Update May 2009:
It seems we didn’t have all the facts. It would now seem that this is another child abuse case since the Section 59 vote.
Under the old Section 59 I suspect that the verdict would have been the same. The father would have been tried under a jury and found guilty.
Only now under the new Section 59 any parent who uses any force to correct their child is suspect.
From:
http://section59.blogspot.com/2008/01/anti-parental-authority-law.html
Anti-Parental-Authority Law Criminalises Loving Father
Jimmy Mason was out for a walk with his two boys – Seth, 3yrs and Zach, 2yrs. They were having a great time learning to ride the bikes that they had recieved as an early Christmas present. Making their way along Cashel Mall in Christchurch, they came up to the Bridge of Remembrance.
This magnificent memorial was built as an enduring mark of gratituded to the thousands of young men from Christchurch who selflessly gave their lives to defend our Free Land of New Zealand from the tyranous usurpers, many thousands of miles over the water. They fought and died so that the generations that came after them might live in freedom and without fear of oppression from any government, whether it be their own, or a foreign governement.
As all little boys do, Seth and Zach crouched low over their handlebars, racing down the ramp leading down from the bridge, the path leading around a sharp corner. Seth, one year older than his brother, took the corner nicely. Zach however, struggled to keep control of his bike – and losing control, he smashed into the solid brick construction of the bridge. When his father ran up to assist his 2yr old son, he found him lying on the ground, holding his hand to his eye.
Seth had stopped at the corner. He looked down at his brother, lying on the ground, slipping in and out of conciousness. He saw the concern on his dad’s face, and heard him say “wait Seth, we have to look after Zach”. Whether or not he understood how serious the situation, it was with loving fatherly discipline that Jimmy flicked his son on the ear as he started peddling away.
An off-duty police-officer stood nearby, and she immediately reported the incident. With a few minutes, six uniformed police officers stood around the Man and his two little boys. As Jimmy cradled his injured toddler in his lap, one policemen pulled out his notebook as another pulled out his radio and spoke brusquely to head-office.
One can only imagine how scared the two little boys must have been, and the terrifying thoughts rushing through their dad’s head. How was he going to tell his wife that their children were going to be put into a foster-home?…
——————————–
Sue Bradford (Green Party MP):
Ms Bradford, the instigator of the anti-smacking legislation, says if an adult whacked another adult around the ear, they would be “marched down to the slammer.”
Ms Bradford says parents need to accept that it is no longer legal to hit children. She remains confident her anti-smacking laws will change what she describes as a culture of violence.
from http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz
Cindy Kiro, “Children’s Commissioner”:
Children’s Commissioner Cindy Kiro says she is pleased to see people in the community making a stand against violence towards children after a Christchurch man was reported for flicking his son’s ear.
“The most common cause of death by child abuse in this country is from injuries to the head. This should never be taken lightly.”
from http://www.nzherald.co.nz
——————————–
Kiro and Bradford, are both part of the huge bireaucracy of New Zealand. Kiro’s role as “children’s commissioner” was appointed by the Labour Government, and Bradford got into Parliament as a list MP. Neither of them represent New Zealanders. Bradford puts a spin on the case, labelling the flicked ear as a whack around the ear. In a statement to the media a couple of hours later, Kiro joins in the martyrdom of the caring father, firstly by honouring the off-duty police-woman that reported the incident, and then by linking child deaths resulting from being bashed on the head with a light flick on the ear.
Jimmy Mason:
“It was pretty bizarre to tell you the truth.”
“[The police officers] didn’t know and I said to them, ‘Well, you’ve just told me what I did was wrong so you must know what is right’.”
“It needs to be on record that I disciplined him for something he deserved, not that I’m a child beater. There’s an irony there that they can spray, Taser or shoot me but I can’t flick my son in the ear to stop him getting run over at an intersection.”
He was considering legal action to have the warning removed from his record.
——————————–
Seth and Zach are now confused, because they know that their daddy who they love is in trouble with the police. Jimmy is angry because he now has a warning on his record, and CYFS will be faster than ever to remove his children from him and his wife if they hear the slightest little thing.
Leave a Reply